Re: Turning GNU into a bottom-up organization

[Alfred M. Szmidt]

   Alfred M. Szmidt, le jeu. 24 oct. 2019 15:33:51 -0400, a ecrit:
   >    > The GNU project is not a porject that is suitable for a bottom-up
   >    > organization -- its mission, and only mission, is to see that the GNU
   >    > system is and keeps being free software.  This has been explained
   >    > ample of times.
   > 
   >    I don't see how bottom-up cannot get this. How different is this from
   >    Debian in that regard for instance?
   > 
   > Debian renegaded on their goal of being a 100% free software system,
   > they now include non-free software.

   What is called "Debian" does not include the non-free archive, that
   archive is not enabled by default, the user has to make an explicit
   action to enable it.

Debian clearly includes non-free software, and no amount of wiggling
with words will change that fact -- they host it on their machines,
they recommend it to their users on their own web pages, they exclude
free documentation, and they distribute binary blobs in their version
of Linux.  That the Debian social contract claims that Debian is a
100% free system, doesn't make it so, nor does it _keep_ it free --
the only way to keep something free is to be unrelenting, something
that has worked very well in the GNU project.

What your example shows is that Debian's way of handling things in
this specific regard (they have been successful in others) has been a
complete and utter failure to protect computer users rights.  And that
is the exact type word wiggling that we shouldn't accept here, and the
exact reason why this project is run the way it is run.

   > And I've been involved for 30 years...

   That's irrelevant.  You can't say that it has worked for 30 years,
   when I have seen issues for at least 8 years, which is already too
   long (and these issues may have crop up before I have been
   involved, I can't say, that's what I meant).

I haven't seen any of these issues, what I have seen is people trying
to remove the protections we have from being turned into a project
that would start accepting non-free software.

Saying that someones experience is irrelevant is also not the nicest
way of a disucssion, you raised the amount you've been involved, and I
did not ignore that.

We don't promote non-free software, we don't host non-free software,
so clearly things have worked for 30 years where they have not for
Debian.  And the reason for that is the strong stance against non-free
software, and dedication from RMS on the subject.